H. T. v. Canada Employment Insurance Commission

H. T. v. Canada Employment Insurance Commission

The Tribunal found on the balance of probabilities that the appellant voluntarily and willfully refused to comply with a contractual requirement to resume full‑time work and declined reasonable accommodations; she knew or ought to have known that refusal could lead to dismissal; therefore her loss of employment was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2016 SSTGDEI 75
Parties
Appellant/claimant: H. T.; Respondent: Canada Employment Insurance Commission; Employer: Valeant Pharmaceuticals
Court
Social Security Tribunal of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Employment Insurance Misconduct / General Division Decision (oral Hearing)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; indefinite disqualification imposed under s.30(1) of the Employment Insurance Act
Legal Topics
Misconduct, Disqualification Under S.30, Voluntary Leaving, Just Cause, Accommodation, Family Status
Source Language
english
Employment Insurance Administrative Law Labour Law Misconduct Disqualification Under S.30 Voluntary Leaving Just Cause Accommodation +1 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

H. T.

Appellant/claimant

Canada Employment Insurance Commission

Respondent

Valeant Pharmaceuticals

Employer

Procedural Posture

Employment Insurance Misconduct / General Division Decision (oral Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant lost employment by reason of her own misconduct under s.30(1) of the Employment Insurance Act
  2. 2 Whether the claimant voluntarily left without just cause
  3. 3 Whether refusal to return to full‑time work was justified by employer's failure to accommodate family status

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found on the balance of probabilities that the appellant voluntarily and willfully refused to comply with a contractual requirement to resume full‑time work and declined reasonable accommodations; she knew or ought to have known that refusal could lead to dismissal; therefore her loss of employment was by reason of her own misconduct and an indefinite disqualification under s.30(1) is warranted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; indefinite disqualification imposed under s.30(1) of the Employment Insurance Act

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Indefinite disqualification imposed pursuant to section 30(1) of the Employment Insurance Act.